Top Law Schools

.

Yeah, you could take one as a diagnostic. Don't let it lower your expectations though. Lots of people have made huge improvements over their diagnostic with study. Most people who study probably improve at least 10 points from their diagnostic score.

.

I'm actually not a big fan of timed diagnostics in general. You have never seen the type of questions on the test before so are bound not to do as well as you could with prep (obviously) and timing yourself would only further hamper you. Just go through a preptest section one at a time to get a feel for the material. Then, once you're comfortable and have read through Powerscore Bibles, etc. practice with timed preptests.

sporadic prep never really helped me personally. I have found that the best kind of preparation is continuous prep starting 3-4 months before the test.

.

To each his own I guess. I don't see the harm in glancing through the material from time to time before you have to buckle down for the 3-4 month stretch.

Doing a timed diagnostic motivated me because I knew with unlimited time or more practice I could work out the logic games, and it made me realize how much work would be involved!

Although it must be taken with a grain of salt/luck, a diagnostic can help you see what your weaknesses and strengths might be, which could help you focus your prep when you begin in earnest. Of course, you shouldn't blow off prep for things you performed well on during the diagnostic, but when you come down to a time crunch this information might help you determine where your priorities lie. Also, your results might inform you as to your ideal "serious prep"schedule, which is better than starting too late because you thought you would perform better than you actually did.

I'm in the same boat as you and I plan on at least starting my study this summer. I took an original diagnostic test that was offered for free in my area and I found it very helpful. If anything it gave me some idea of how the actual test day will feel and taught me how much of a grind the test actually is. My plan is to got through some practice books and get an idea of what methods work for me and which don't this summer, so that when I begin to study in earnest next January I will be able to go full steam ahead.

.

howlery wrote:I've decided to just take the free LSAC test from their website (June 2007). It doesn't have an experimental, which may or may not be a problem. What are the pros/cons of timing vs. not timing it? Or does it really not matter since I won't begin my preparation in earnest for a few months?

Take it timed if you want to know the (mostly irrelevant) score you would get if you walked in and took the test without any prep. The LSAT tests you on how well you prepare for a test, so how you do without any preparation is pretty useless except to be able to look back on the score and feel better about yourself after having studied for a few months. I'd say take it one section at a time to get your feet wet and become at least acquainted with what the test creators are trying to gauge. I wouldn't recommend taking it timed straight from the beginning, focus on getting a good grasp of the concepts first. If you don't understand the test and can't get the questions right, it doesn't matter how quickly you finish.

.

howlery wrote:

alwayssunnyinfl wrote:

howlery wrote:I've decided to just take the free LSAC test from their website (June 2007). It doesn't have an experimental, which may or may not be a problem. What are the pros/cons of timing vs. not timing it? Or does it really not matter since I won't begin my preparation in earnest for a few months?

Take it timed if you want to know the (mostly irrelevant) score you would get if you walked in and took the test without any prep. The LSAT tests you on how well you prepare for a test, so how you do without any preparation is pretty useless except to be able to look back on the score and feel better about yourself after having studied for a few months. I'd say take it one section at a time to get your feet wet and become at least acquainted with what the test creators are trying to gauge. I wouldn't recommend taking it timed straight from the beginning, focus on getting a good grasp of the concepts first. If you don't understand the test and can't get the questions right, it doesn't matter how quickly you finish.

Thanks, I think I'll take it un-timed and see how I do. I just hope taking it on my bed with Springer in the background isn't too far of a leap from test conditions .

Jerry! Jerry! Jerry!

He was a regular at the coffee shop where I used to work. The best way to piss him off is to ask for a name for his cup every time he would order

-4 on LG and -8 on what I think was LR (but there are 2?). Saving RC and the other LR for later.

howlery wrote:-4 on LG and -8 on what I think was LR (but there are 2?). Saving RC and the other LR for later.

Yeah, there are always 2 LR sections. That's a great start, especially since a lot of LR is just learning the jargon and the roundabout ways that they're asking you for pretty straight forward conclusions. Having LR as your weak section to start is good because any gains you make in LR basically count as double any gains you make in another sections since LR is 50% of the exam.

Forgot to add: 154.
-4 LG
-8 LR
-8 LR
-12 RC (Aced the first passage, was distracted for the rest of them. Still, ouch.)
Is 168-170 crazy from this starting point?

Maybe I should bang out the LSAT the June after I graduate. It would make my time off before law school a bit less worrisome.

howlery wrote:Forgot to add: 154.
-4 LG
-8 LR
-8 LR
-12 RC (Aced the first passage, was distracted for the rest of them. Still, ouch.)
Is 168-170 crazy from this starting point?

Maybe I should bang out the LSAT the June after I graduate. It would make my time off before law school a bit less worrisome.

I think you could even score higher than that considering you have more than a whole year to prepare for it. If you are willing to put in a lot of time and a lot of hard work I think you could easily score in the 170s. Since this is a test you really can learn the score you get will be proportional to the effort you put in. Nice starting point!

jrsbaseball5 wrote:

howlery wrote:Forgot to add: 154.
-4 LG
-8 LR
-8 LR
-12 RC (Aced the first passage, was distracted for the rest of them. Still, ouch.)
Is 168-170 crazy from this starting point?

Maybe I should bang out the LSAT the June after I graduate. It would make my time off before law school a bit less worrisome.

I think you could even score higher than that considering you have more than a whole year to prepare for it. If you are willing to put in a lot of time and a lot of hard work I think you could easily score in the 170s. Since this is a test you really can learn the score you get will be proportional to the effort you put in. Nice starting point!

Thanks! I think I'll try to write the June 2013 test. I'm so excited to start prepping, the test is actually kind of fun.

howlery wrote:I'm so excited to start prepping, the test is actually kind of fun.

I used to say this to people. The responses I usually got convinced me to stop saying it. Welcome to the club